Democrat Gottheimer needs to spend less time condemning and more time explaining

By Sussex County Watchdog

He’s at it again.   Yesterday, in the midst of an actual shooting war between the United States of America and the Islamic Republic of Iran, Congressman Josh Gottheimer called a press conference to tell us that the real threat came from… other Americans.  Especially “white” Americans. 

Why is Gottheimer ignoring the existential threat posed to Israel and Jews around the world by the Islamic Republic of Iran?  Why is he trying so hard to change the subject?  Founded in the wake of the 1979 revolution, the Islamic Republic of Iran rests on a “foundation of three pillars.”  They are:  (1) The mandatory veil (hijab) for women; (2) Opposition to the United States of America; and (3) Opposition to Israel.  Look it up! 
 
Instead of trying to blame Americans for all the world’s troubles, perhaps Congressman Gottheimer should adopt a little humility, search his own past, and atone for some of his own actions.   Before he was elected to Congress in 2016, Josh Gottheimer followed his buddy Mark Penn, the Clintons' polling guy, to take over an international public relations/lobbying corporation called Burson-Marsteller.  These folks are a real piece of work. 
 
Hey, don't take out word for it.  Here's what MSNBC's Rachel Maddow had to say about the firm where Josh Gottheimer held the number two position as International Vice President (his buddy Mark Penn was International President):

Yep, Josh Gottheimer and his pal Mark Penn ran the "PR Firm from Hell"!
 
Maybe Josh Gottheimer should explain what he got up to at the "PR Firm from Hell"?  Maybe offer a little apology?

HATE: Left moves on from hunting people on social media to movies about killing them.

If you are someone like Jerry Scanlan, the Sussex County GOP Chairman, you already know what the movie “The Hunt” is all about.  After Sussex County legislators demanded that the state Attorney General come to Sussex County to explain to county taxpayers why their Sheriff was being asked to comply with the Murphy administration’s illegal Sanctuary scheme, the state Democrat Party assigned a local Democrat the task of stalking Scanlan’s social media, to find something to kill his political career.

As we know from the testimony of several Democrat insiders, the Murphy administration was desperate to change the topic from its illegal Sanctuary scheme to something else.  So Scanlan was stalked by Democrats who soon found that he had been sloppy in monitoring the content of a handful of MAGA re-tweets.  After hunting for something to be offended about, the stalkers found it, promptly exclaimed that they had been “offended” and then demanded that Scanlan be fired for the offense of “Free Speech”.

The Democrats appear to forget that here – in America – in this country, we have something called the Bill of Rights.  The same Bill of Rights that allows Democrats to do some of their favorite things… like burn the American flag, or wipe their feet on it, or disrespect Disabled American Veterans (something the Left has been up to since the end of the Vietnam War), or paint a portrait of the Virgin Mother using feces, or place a Christian cross in a vat of urine… The same Bill of Rights allows someone to re-tweet something that is disrespectful of Islam or of Left wing politicians or of Caucasian politicians who claim to be “of color”. 

And even though Scanlan said that the controversial re-tweets were not intentional, that they were mistakenly re-tweeted as part of long Twitter “trains”, and that he apologized for doing it… the stalkers are on the hunt and they want their trophy.  Rather like the new movie the Left is promoting…

Comcast’s board of directors is stone silent amid widespread controversy over the media conglomerate’s “The Hunt” movie that has ruffled feathers for reportedly depicting humans hunting people with different political views for sport as the country mourns a pair of mass shootings.

NBC’s Universal Pictures falls under the Comcast cooperate umbrella, along with liberal news network MSNBC.

A Deadline report confirming the screenplay had been picked for production described the movie as “politically charged,” and The Hollywood Reporter sets up the battle as between “elite liberals” hunting “MAGA types.”

The hypocrisy of some Democrats has jumped the bounds of decency. 

The Murphy administration places gag orders against whistleblowers in a rape case, as it sends stalkers to hunt for something to be “offended” about, so it can have someone fired. 

Murphy’s media allies published the “offensive” material – that nobody would have even known existed if not for the media publishing it – and then claim that so many people have been “offended” that someone must be fired. 

Of course, the media was never “offended” when someone burned the American flag, or wiped their feet on it, or trashed Disabled American Veterans, or placed a Christian cross in a vat of urine.  They never asked that someone be fired for offending millions of Americans.  The media called those offenders “heroes”, even called some of their offensive material “art” and said it should be supported with tax dollars.

The Democrats have long supported flag burning.  Have long voted to spend taxpayer money to support “transgressive” art – so long as it transgressed against America and traditional values.  Now, when such transgression applies to Islam or far-left politicians… they call it “hate”.

Just hypocrites and corrupt politicians on the make.

Pro-Sanctuary State NBC “hit job” triggers calls for FCC investigation

We’ve received word that Republican leaders are planning to contact the chief counsel of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) with evidence that NBC aired what amounted to a negative political ad against Republican Sheriff Mike Strada.  A Sussex County Republican, Strada is leading the fight against Democrat Governor Phil Murphy’s Sanctuary State scheme to block federal law enforcement and to allow illegal aliens to reside in New Jersey and access welfare, health, education, and legal benefits (many of which are not available to legal resident  taxpayers).

Sarah Wallace is a Bergen County Democrat.  She is what’s called a “hard” Democrat – totally loyal to her party, never missing an election, always supporting whatever Clinton or Murphy that appears on the ballot.  And she is proud of it.

Given the public information available about her, we were surprised when we learned that NBC – the parent company of Rachel Maddow’s MSNBC – chose her to do a segment on the primary campaign between Sheriff Mike Strada and Jail Guard Andy Boden.  Especially as Boden had previously bragged to a member of the local, Sussex County media, that the interview was going to be a “hit job” on Sheriff Strada.

Further complicating matters is Sheriff Strada’s central role in opposing Democrat Governor Phil Murphy’s Sanctuary State scheme.  In the past, Sarah Wallace has done interviews that were very favorable to illegals and against members of law enforcement.  In fact, Sarah Wallace is currently being sued by a police officer for her conduct and behavior.

Last November, a New York judge accused someone championed by Sarah Wallace – named Manny Gomez – of “coercing a witness to a gang slaying not to testify.”  According to the New York Daily News (November 3, 2018), police have suggested that Sarah Wallace and Manny Gomez have “an apparent relationship” and that Wallace does stories that favor Gomez. 

Why did Boden go to Wallace, a Democrat, and why was he so sure she would do a “hit job” for him on Sheriff Strada?

And why are the NBC attacks being promoted by the Democrat Party – if this is supposedly a Republican primary?  In a departure from normal journalistic protocols, NBC has promoted their “hit job” on Sheriff Strada to left-wing blogs.  Was Bergen Democrat Sarah Wallace herself the source of promoting the “hit job” on those leftist blogs? 

Candidate Boden continues to claim that County Clerk Jeff Parrott triggered the psychological examination that resulted in a police psychiatrist finding him “unfit” for duty.   Boden claimed that it was the result of him picking up petitions to run for office.  The County Clerk disputes Boden’s contention that he came to his office to obtain the nominating petitions.

After months of being asked to produce evidence to support his claim, Boden finally “discovered” an email that he claims is from the County Clerk’s office, in which they instructed him to obtain the petitions on-line.  This is itself a departure from Boden’s original story, which was that he visited the County Clerk’s office.  But that embellishment aside, how are we to believe that this email isn’t doctored in the same way that the FAKE video was doctored that his campaign said was coming days before it was released?

In fact, Boden’s psychological evaluation came after a series of incidents including some that left female employees intimidated and fearful of having him over them.  After a police psychologist found him “unfit for duty” and he was placed on leave, Boden went to Sheriff Strada and asked him to restore him to duty – which meant giving him back his power over people, a firearm, handcuffs, and badge.  The Sheriff’s office told Boden that he needed to get well first and re-evaluated by a mental health professional, before he could be re-instated.

Boden’s claim that he was ruled “unfit for duty” because he was running for office, repeated again in the Wallace interview, is clearly a lie.The public testimony of the police psychologist who ruled Boden “unfit for duty” makes it very clear that Boden is not being honest:

A.     The whole point of the

fitness-for-duty evaluation in many cases is to

avoid things getting to that point.  We are --

you know, as the IACP, we're looking for

conditions that are going to impact someone's

ability to safely and effectively do their work.

We want to keep that environment safe.  We also

want to treat people compassionately.  And if we

see that someone is under duress, to try to

intervene and help them.

             Fitness-for-duty evaluations are

often seen as punitive in nature, but they don't

necessarily have to be or need to be.  The idea

is to intervene much in the same way as an EAP

and get someone help before there's an incident,

before someone does get injured or before

something becomes career ending.

      Q.     Based upon the information that

you had received and gathered during the course

of this assessment, could you rule out that

Lt. Bannon (sic) wouldn't hurt somebody

prospectively if allowed to work while getting

therapy?

      A.     I could not rule that out.

      Q.     At any point did you tell

Lt. Bannon (sic) that he had passed the

assessment?  Boden.  I'm sorry. 

      A.     No.  We don't give anyone results,

pass or fail, at the end of the evaluation.

      Q.     Does somebody pass?

      A.     They are found fit to return to

their duty.

      Q.     Right.  Or unfit.

      A.     Or unfit.  And then when unfit,

they are given conditions with the goal of

restoring fitness.

      Q.     And your case -- and in this case,

what were those conditions to restore fitness?

      A.     Lt. Boden was to engage in

individual treatment outside of the treatment

that he had already been receiving with his wife

with the sole purpose on managing his stress

level, identifying coping mechanisms that work

for him so that he could return to his position.

      Q.     And in the meantime, as an

individual who was unfit for duty, he should not

be working while receiving that initial

treatment, correct?

      A.     You cannot return to duty if you

are found unfit.

Boden’s case mirrors the current national debate concerning mental health and gun laws.  Should employers act when they observe traumatic stress in employees (in this case, confirmed by a mental health professional) or should they wait until after something actually happens?  It is a complex issue.

In the Wallace interview, Boden also claimed to have had no knowledge of the doctored video that was sent around in an attempt to damage Sheriff Mike Strada’s family.  The video also attempted to destroy the reputation of an innocent young firefighter.  NBC and Sarah Wallace made no attempt to protect the innocent woman whose image was used in the FAKE video doctored by Andy Boden’s campaign.  They did not receive her permission to use the video of her which was made against her will and then doctored to make her look bad.  Night after night NBC and Sarah Wallace ran the doctored image of this innocent woman, simply for salacious clickbait.  She is a private citizen and Andy Boden, his campaign, Sarah Wallace, and NBC have much to answer for. 

Andy Boden, his campaign, Sarah Wallace, and NBC used the video knowing that it was found to be a FAKE and totally false by the media and law enforcement.  Despite Boden’s lies in the Wallace interview, a statement from Sussex County Republican Chairman Jerry Scanlan makes it very clear that it was the Boden campaign behind the release of the doctored FAKE video:

The above is the direct testimony of the Republican Party Chairman regarding the attempted shakedown that occurred before the FAKE doctored video was released.  Clearly Boden’s campaign knew all about the video that later nobody wanted to take credit for.  Why did NBC not require Sarah Wallace to contact this source before airing its “hit job”? 

Why did Andy Boden tell Sarah Wallace that he knew nothing?  Why did Sarah Wallace and NBC allow Boden to lie?

NBC lies in "hit job" by Bergen Democrat

Sarah Wallace is a Bergen County Democrat.  She is what’s called a “hard” Democrat – totally loyal to her party, never missing an election, always supporting whatever Clinton or Murphy that appears on the ballot.  And she is proud of it.

Given the public information available about her, we were surprised when we learned that NBC – the parent company of Rachel Maddow’s MSNBC – chose her to do a segment on the primary campaign between Sheriff Mike Strada and Jail Guard Andy Boden.  Especially as Boden had previously bragged to a member of the local, Sussex County media, that the interview was going to be a “hit job” on Sheriff Strada.

Further complicating matters is Sheriff Strada’s central role in opposing Democrat Governor Phil Murphy’s Sanctuary State scheme.  In the past, Sarah Wallace has done interviews that were very favorable to illegals and against members of law enforcement.  In fact, Sarah Wallace is currently being sued by a police officer for her conduct and behavior.  

Last November, a New York judge accused someone championed by Sarah Wallace – named Manny Gomez – of “coercing a witness to a gang slaying not to testify.” According to the New York Daily News (November 3, 2018), police have suggested that Sarah Wallace and Manny Gomez have “an apparent relationship” and that Wallace does stories that favor Gomez.  

Why did Boden go to Wallace, a Democrat, and why was he so sure she would do a “hit job” for him on Sheriff Strada?

In any case, the resulting story did more to harm Andy Boden than it did to help him.  On camera, Boden was induced by Wallace to lie about two important aspects of his story.

The first is that his psychological examination was the result of him picking up petitions to run for office.  The County Clerk, Jeff Parrott, disputes Boden’s contention that he came to his office to obtain the nominating petitions.  It appears that Andy Boden is lying about this and that he lied in testimony given at his fitness hearing.  As this statement by his attorney shows:

According to the County Clerk and his office, Boden did not come into the office to pick up the nominating petitions – he accessed them on line, so that nobody could have known that he was running.

In fact, Boden’s psychological evaluation came after a series of incidents including some that left female employees intimidated and fearful of having him over them.  After a police psychologist found him “unfit for duty” and he was placed on leave, Boden went to Sheriff Strada and asked him to restore him to duty – which meant giving him back his power over people, a firearm, handcuffs, and badge.  The Sheriff’s office told Boden that he needed to get well first and re-evaluated by a mental health professional, before he could be re-instated. 

Boden’s claim that he was ruled “unfit for duty” because he was running for office, repeated again in the Wallace interview, is clearly a lie.  The public testimony of the police psychologist who ruled Boden “unfit for duty” makes it very clear that Boden is not being honest:

 A.     The whole point of the

fitness-for-duty evaluation in many cases is to

avoid things getting to that point.  We are --

you know, as the IACP, we're looking for

conditions that are going to impact someone's

ability to safely and effectively do their work.

We want to keep that environment safe.  We also

want to treat people compassionately.  And if we

see that someone is under duress, to try to

intervene and help them.

            Fitness-for-duty evaluations are

often seen as punitive in nature, but they don't

necessarily have to be or need to be.  The idea

is to intervene much in the same way as an EAP

and get someone help before there's an incident,

before someone does get injured or before

something becomes career ending.

      Q.     Based upon the information that

you had received and gathered during the course

of this assessment, could you rule out that

Lt. Bannon (sic) wouldn't hurt somebody

prospectively if allowed to work while getting

therapy?

      A.     I could not rule that out.

      Q.     At any point did you tell

Lt. Bannon (sic) that he had passed the

assessment?  Boden.  I'm sorry.

      A.     No. We don't give anyone results,

pass or fail, at the end of the evaluation.

      Q.     Does somebody pass?

      A.     They are found fit to return to

their duty.

      Q.     Right. Or unfit.

      A.     Or unfit. And then when unfit,

they are given conditions with the goal of

restoring fitness.

      Q.     And your case -- and in this case,

what were those conditions to restore fitness?

      A.     Lt. Boden was to engage in

individual treatment outside of the treatment

that he had already been receiving with his wife

with the sole purpose on managing his stress

level, identifying coping mechanisms that work

for him so that he could return to his position.

      Q.     And in the meantime, as an

individual who was unfit for duty, he should not

be working while receiving that initial

treatment, correct?

      A.     You cannot return to duty if you

are found unfit.

Boden’s case mirrors the current national debate concerning mental health and gun laws.  Should employers act when they observe traumatic stress in employees (in this case, confirmed by a mental health professional) or should they wait until after something actually happens?  It is a complex issue.

In the Wallace interview, Boden also claimed to have had no knowledge of the doctored video that was sent around in an attempt to damage Sheriff Mike Strada’s family.  The video also attempted to destroy the reputation of an innocent young firefighter. It was found to be a FAKE and totally false by the media and law enforcement.  Despite Boden’s lies in the Wallace interview, a statement from Sussex County Republican Chairman Jerry Scanlan makes it very clear that it was the Boden campaign behind the release of the doctored FAKE video:

The above is the direct testimony of the Republican Party Chairman regarding the attempted shakedown that occurred before the FAKE doctored video was released.  Clearly Boden’s campaign knew all about the video that later nobody wanted to take credit for.

So why did Boden tell Sarah Wallace that he knew nothing?  Why did he lie?

Glenn Greenwald: MSNBC/CNN = State TV & CIA TV

This is a must watch video.  Conservative Tucker Carlson and Liberal Glenn Greenwald discuss the state of modern journalism and the media’s campaign to get Donald Trump at all costs…

The Hugin campaign would have done better in a Democrat primary.

Bob Hugin is a great guy.  Really.  He’s a good and decent man.  It was unfortunate that he found himself in a Republican primary… this year.  The fact that he persevered with such confidence and grace makes him a heroic, somewhat tragic, figure.  

Bob Hugin could have run in the Democrat primary.  $35 million… against Bob Menendez?  Hugin had the issues right for a Democrat primary… and the media wouldn’t have pounced on a Democrat Bob Hugin the way they did a Republican Bob Hugin.  The media love rich members of the One Percent when they are Democrats (it is a capital sin when you are a Republican)… they love woke, right-on pharma folk of the proper political affiliation.  They would have forgiven him everything.

But Bob ran as a Republican, and he ran this year.  A year when the media he wanted to appeal to was working to nationalize the election – to make it about Trump.  That media ended up vouching for Bob Menendez, despite having formerly called for his resignation. That media still cuts it with the people who Bob Hugin wanted to convince:  Democrats and liberal-leaners.   

Rather than shutting down Menendez, Hugin’s attacks were used by the media as evidence that he – Bob Hugin – was a “bad” man.  Of course, this only works with those who are open to receiving a message from the likes of Tom Moran and MSNBC.  Unfortunately, they were precisely the voters that the Hugin campaign was aimed at. 

Can we put aside the myth that Republican voters will come out no matter what, and dutifully vote Republican?  That myth should have finally, once and for all, been discarded after the low turnout Assembly races in 2015, when Republicans AGAIN lost seats in the Legislature and were AGAIN provided with irrelevant excuses for having done so. 

Oh the excuses!  One year it is Christie’s fault, the next it is Trump’s, and in between, the dog ate it!  New Jersey Republicans should set up their own public relations firm specializing in excuse-making.  Excuses aside, New Jersey’s GOP establishment should understand that the days of Republicans “holding their noses” and voting are over.

Republican voters are like anyone else.  Ignore them, say you are embarrassed to be with them, that you are “different” from them… and they will reward you in kind.  As an experiment, try some of that language next time you are in public with your wife and her family (or your husband and his).  Invite them out to a restaurant, then tell the host:  “I’m a different kind of member of this family, I’m not really one of them… They are a little, umm… backward.”  And say it so they hear it.  Say it loud, like ten million dollars’ worth of loud, and see how they like it.  Go ahead, try it.  Get back to us on it.

And that’s what the whole Hugin campaign was based on, wasn’t it?

“I’m a different kind of Republican.”  They are a little backward, a little off, but I’m with it.  I am a cool Republican.  Except that there are no “cool” Republicans.  Not in the minds of the media.  They only thought John McCain was cool when he was pissing on Bush.  The moment it became about him and Obama, John McCain became a troglodyte in the minds of the media.  After the dust settled, he became cool again, especially when pissing on other Republicans… especially when pissing on Trump.  But when he needed them, the media screwed John McCain.  So why even bother with them?

President Ronald Reagan understood the media (and they were a lot more condensed, more centralized, and a lot stronger back then).  That’s why he talked past them – to the people.  He didn’t give a damn about their approval.  He fed them the diet he wanted them to eat and even when they shit it out it contained the kernels of his message.  Reagan wasn’t afraid to be a Republican and to explain what that meant.  He had a message that he tested and honed by human contact – by speaking to people, engaging them, listening for the examples that would be used in his speeches, turning them on to his way of thinking, building a movement of ideas and about issues that mattered to people.

How many Republicans today, in New Jersey, can explain why they are Republicans or what Republicanism is?  At the big Republican show put on by the NJGOP last spring in Atlantic City, two professional Republican organizers up from Washington, DC, posed the same questions to attendees.  Not only was there no apparent theme or connectivity between the responses, even the organizers couldn’t adequately provide reasons or an explanation as to why they were there in the first place.  It was kind of sad.

What that confab did showcase, however, is the top-down meddling that has become the hallmark of the establishment in New Jersey, with a congressional candidate in a contested primary receiving top billing as the event’s featured speaker.  Yes, there was resource-draining meddling in districts 2, 5, and 11 – in an effort to promote candidates who would fit seamlessly with the statewide message being promoted by the campaign of Bob Hugin.

Instead of building a grassroots coalition of Republicans and reformers – of the kind Ralph Nader wrote about in his book, Unstoppable – the Hugin campaign  actually determined that their best chance lay in targeting “soft” Democrats and culturally “left-leaning” independents.  But these are the very same voters open to arguments from left-leaning media like CNN, MSNBC, NJ.com, and the Bergen Record.  So when the Hugin campaign pushed a relentlessly negative message about Menendez, those “independent arbiters” pushed back and were listened to. 

This allowed the Menendez campaign to focus on making the link between Hugin and Trump – which the media backed up.  The more the media pressed, the more Hugin denied Trump, the more he suppressed his own base.  Meanwhile, the Hugin campaign went right on churning out GOTV communications and efforts to turn out those “soft” Democrats and culturally “left-leaning” independents who had by now been convinced by the media that Hugin was a “bad” man who was lying about Menendez.  Gagged and gagged again.

In the days and weeks ahead we will be taking a proper, in depth, examination of the Republican operation in the Garden State.  It will be a necessary, warts and all, detailed review.  So stay tuned.

For now, we will leave you with this: 

“Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.”  - Winston Churchill

The Kavanaugh show trial. Is this Booker’s “Darkness at Noon” moment?

By Rubashov

We have all seen how United States Senator Cory Booker has morphed from a rather lightweight celebrity whore into a novitiate Stalinist, with a particular dislike for Israel…

All that remains to be determined is the kind of interrogator Booker will be.  A starched-assed Gletkin?  Perhaps.  Or a cynical Ivanov?  Whatever… just as in 1938, Booker’s position is already determined.

Ben Shapiro has written a great piece on the coming show trial…

On Monday evening, Wonkette founder Ana Marie Cox let the cat out of the bag regarding the Left’s perspective on the allegations of sexual assault against Judge Brett Kavanaugh: it doesn’t matter whether he’s guilty or innocent. He’s guilty.

Cox was appearing on Lawrence O’Donnell’s The Last Word on MSNBC when she made this shocking claim:

“We need to judge Brett Kavanaugh, not just by what he may or may not have done, but how he treats a woman’s pain. And that is something I’m going to be paying attention to on Monday. How does he respond to what’s happening. Whether or not he agrees that this happened with her, does he take her pain seriously? Do the people interrogating her pain take her pain seriously? Now, I’ll give you a spoiler alert, I don’t think Brett Kavanaugh takes women’s pain very seriously, and I know that because of the decisions he’s made as a judge.”

This is a morally abhorrent statement. So if a woman falsely accuses a man of rape, we don’t judge him based on whether he actually raped her – we judge him based on whether he feels the pain of a person falsely accusing him of rape. The real question of the Duke lacrosse case, by this standard, wasn’t whether a stripper was actually raped – the question is whether the members of the Duke lacrosse team were sensitive to her feelings while she was falsely accusing them of rape.

That would be an insane statement enough. But Cox goes even further: she already knows that Kavanaugh won’t meet her standard of sympathy because he hasn’t decided cases how she likes on key “feminist” issues, presumably like abortion. Now, never mind that Kavanaugh hasn’t actually signaled that he’d be willing to overturn Roe v. Wade. Think about the underlying contention: we can tell whether you are a bad person by your level of sympathy for a rape accuser whom you believe is lying about you, and we can judge your level of sympathy by looking at your political decisions. The logic is simple: if you’re a person who disagrees with Ana Marie Cox, you can be slandered as a rapist, and any attempt to rebut such accusations will amount to a lack of sympathy.

This is Stalinist show trial stuff. It’s immoral and perverse. But presumably Cox knows that and doesn’t care. She knows, deep in her heart, that Kavanaugh is a bad man – and if he was just maligned as a rapist, that’s a merely secondary concern. It’s hard to come up with a more bad-faith approach to a serious allegation than that.

In honor of Comrade Booker of the Democratic Socialists, we advance this theme music to be played at the start of the show trial…

Summer Reading: Important columns you must read.

In an effort to understand the state of America at this moment, we’ve been perusing columns by writers from across the political spectrum.  Glenn Greenwald is a left-of-center journalist and reformer of outstanding integrity.  Peter Heck is a cultural and religious conservative who writes for The Resurgent, a blog edited by Erick Erickson.  More will follow.

Glenn Greenwald… The Intercept (July 8, 2018)

MSNBC Does Not Merely Permit Fabrications Against Democratic Party Critics. It Encourages and Rewards Them.

During the 2016 primary and general election campaigns, various MSNBC hosts were openly campaigning for Hillary Clinton. One of the network’s programs featured Malcolm Nance (pictured above), whose background is quite sketchy but is presented by the cable network (and now by NBC News) as an “intelligence expert” and former intelligence officer for the U.S. Navy.

On August 20, 2016, weekend host Joy Reid asked Nance about the supposed “affinity” for Russia harbored by Jill Stein supporters. In response, Nance told MSNBC viewers: “Jill Stein has a show on Russia Today.” You can still watch the video of this claim here on MSNBC’s own website or see it here…

Whatever your views might be about Stein and her third-party candidacy, there is no disputing the fact that Nance’s statement was a falsehood, a fabrication, a lie. Stein did not have a show on RT, nor did she ever host a show on RT. What Nance said was made up out of whole cloth — fabricated — in order to encourage MSNBC viewers to believe that Stein, one of the candidates running against Clinton, was a paid agent of the Kremlin and employee of RT.

Reid allowed Nance’s lie to stand. Perhaps she did not realize at the time that it was a lie. But subsequently, a campaign was launched to urge MSNBC to correct the lie it broadcast, based on the assumption that MSNBC — which is part of NBC News — was a normal news outlet that functions in accordance with basic journalistic principles and would, of course, correct a false statement once that was brought to its attention…

Read the entire column here: 

https://theintercept.com/2018/07/08/msnbc-does-not-merely-permit-fabrications-against-democratic-party-critics-it-encourages-and-rewards-them/

Peter Heck… The Resurgent (July 24, 2018)

Slouching Towards Pedophilia

Some very provocative and alarming words were spoken recently in Germany. And we better start addressing the issue now.

So by now, most everyone culturally engaged knows about Guardians of the Galaxy director and outspoken President Trump critic James Gunn being fired by Disney for past social media posts. And the exchange of outrage, some hypocritical, predictably emerged from both sides of the political spectrum.

Just to be clear, many of Gunn’s offending posts were indeed gross:

Among the tweets that forced Disney and Marvel’s hand were: “I like when little boys touch me in my silly place.” Another: “The best thing about being raped is when you’re done being raped and it’s like ‘whew this feels great, not being raped!’”

Like I said, gross.

But while everyone is commenting on Gunn’s firing, far fewer people are talking about a much more provocative take on pedophilia that emerged recently at a TedX Talk in Germany. Given the axiom that where Europe is today, the United States will follow within 10 years, maybe it would be more productive to address the merits of what was said there than the jokes of some creepy Hollywood director.

If you missed this story, here are the basics:

Controversy erupted recently over a TEDx talk featuring a German medical student who exclaimed that "pedophilia is an unchangeable sexual orientation, just like … heterosexuality."

The student, Mirjam Heine, gave the talk at the University of Würtzberg in Germany this past May under the title "Why our perception of pedophilia has to change." During her talk, Heine said that people need to recognize that pedophilia is a natural force.

"Anyone could be born a pedophile," she told the audience, citing it as just an "unchangeable sexual orientation just like, for example, heterosexuality."

Read the entire column here: 

https://www.themaven.net/theresurgent/contributors/slouching-towards-pedophilia

Malinowski supports “no-arrest for Terrorists” bill. Why?

Why have Democrats like Tom Malinowski signed-up to support legislation that would prevent federal authorities from arresting virtually anyone within 100 miles of the border, even if that person has committed a serious crime or is suspected of terrorist activities?

The legislation is the brainfart of the Senator from Kooky, the Honorable Dianne Feinstein.  It has one of those nice sounding names that the late Dr. Joseph Goebbels was so adept at coming up with.  No, it’s not the “Law for the Protection of German Women and Families” but rather the  “Keep Families Together Act.”

It is, as everything is these days, a reaction to President Donald Trump’s attempts to get a handle on our national borders.  You know… the borders… through which illegal narcotics, opioids, firearms, and other contraband flow when someone isn’t watching.  And that’s not counting the people smuggling also known as human trafficking, also known (by the United Nations and groups like Amnesty International) as modern slavery.  All those little things liberals don’t like to think about when they get their virtue-signaling on… like the trade in able-bodied workers for cheap labor, the trade in young women and girls for the sex industry (brothels, massage parlors, porn), the trade in children and infants for purchase.   

So all you folks out there who want to be down with Tom Malinowski listen up.  Here is Senator Feinstein herself, on MSNBC, admitting that her legislation is shit…

On June 18th on MSNBC, Sen. Dianne Feinstein admits that the current immigration proposal supported by all 49 members of the Senate Democratic caucus would prevent arrests being made within 100 miles of the US/ Mexico border.

See that… the Democrat admits the bill is a mess and that she would “take out” the part that Senator Susan Collins objected to… you know, the part of the bill that “would essentially prevent arrest within 100 miles of the border, even if the person has committed a serious crime or is suspected of terrorist activities.”

So how come Tom Malinowski… pretty Tom… Tom of the mirror… who is so handsome that he doesn’t expect anybody to suggest that he actually think.  Why is it that Tom Malinowski didn’t see the same bald-faced mess Senator Sue Collins saw?  Why didn’t Tom Malinowski say:  “Hey, I like the idea but you are going to need to fix this because it is just plain crazy.”

Nope, Tom Malinowski just jumped on it.  He’s not one to miss a chance at some brainless virtue-signaling. 

To make matters worse, InsiderNJ reported that Tom Malinowski was “hounding” Congressman Leonard Lance for not being as stupid as Malinowski is.  According to Malinowski, Congressman Lance should let his emotions get the better of his brain and he should follow Malinowski in his folly. 

The Malinowski mantra appears to be:  “Virtue-signal first, think later.”

According to Malinowski, those who don’t join him in supporting legislation that prevents arresting anyone within 100 miles of the border even if the person has committed a serious crime or is a suspected terrorist, are big meanies.  Or in Malinowski’s words:  “Cruel” and “immoral.”

Tom, get a grip.  It is one thing to be a weak-kneed liberal, but being weak-brained is an altogether different matter.

Why is the NJ media so very anti-Roman Catholic?

An interesting case study is emerging in New Jersey political circles that could have national implications and might very well, in the long run, change the way people look at who the "Establishment" really is.  First, the setting...

This story takes place in the same week that a committee of the New Jersey Legislature passed a bill to discriminate against people who do not engage in homo-erotic carnality when handing out government business assistance.  How they determine that, they haven't quite figured out.  Does experimenting in college count?  Does one act count or a dozen?  Is there a time cut-off?  If somebody applied based on the sex partners one had in the 1990's -- would it count?  Do you need to go all the way -- oral, anal, and so on?  And who certifies it?  Does just thinking about it count?  Does someone who is sexually abstinent, but who considers themselves to be part of the LGBT community get the money?  And it is money we are talking about here... taxpayers' money.

Hey, we are all for helping members of the LGBT community -- or indeed, ANY community -- to get a leg up in starting a business.  But make it about NEED.  Base it on their ECONOMIC CLASS -- not on what someone does in his or her or whoever's bedroom (or indeed anywhere else one can think of).  Rich people, no matter what their sexual orientation, don't need any more help.  Money attracts money, and it's all green and all spends the same.  Make it about ECONOMIC CLASS, not about how someone gets off.

So that's the backdrop.  Now here's the story...

We all know that we live at a time when saying the wrong thing about the wrong people can earn someone a media-stoked one-way ticket to demands for your public shaming, loss of employment, and calls for your assisted suicide. Seemingly normal people will spit on your children or poison your dog and think that they are doing so for the greater good... that they are on the side of the angels.

Some have put it down to a state of madness brought on by environmental factors -- as in the Terror during the French Revolution (when apparently a bread mold made everyone take to beheading each other) -- and blame it on all the crazy dieting we do.  Does it never occur to anyone to just ignore the media and stop buying ever varying things to stuff down our gullets?

But we digress...

There are some groups that are sacrosanct.  This is true in every age.  For every time -- there are those who you dare not speak against.  It is a form of blasphemy.  Try saying something against them and there is an immediate backlash from all the forces of Establishment culture.  They are the agreed upon, "sacred" objects.

And everyone else is dreck. 

Well, Roman Catholics, it's official -- so far as the New Jersey media is concerned, so far as most of the political blogs in the state besides this one are concerned -- you are dreck.

Every week someone is calling on someone to resign because they said something or did something.  Go to the wrong concert and stand in front of the wrong band banner and it's... resign; call out some Democrats because they talk like 1930's Fascists and it's... resign; make a joke about the Women's March (which lauded a cop-killer) and it's... resign; and the madness just goes on and on.

The Star-Ledger's Tom Moran can write in introspective detail about how he loathes Catholics and he is praised by the Establishment... they even lay-off a few more workers in celebration!  A few weeks ago, some Democrat who ran for mayor in Bogota claimed that -- 12 years ago -- Steve Lonegan called him a "faggot".  Hey, gay people call each other that, not to mention students in junior high.  It is a rude word. But a hanging offense?

And it was just an accusation.  A dozen years old.  That the accused denied making.  And the accuser said that he wasn't gay.  Soooo.... a hanging offense?

Apparently, yes.  The Star-Ledger's lead moron -- Tommy Moran -- said to hang him high.  He played judge, jury, and executioner and said that Steve Lonegan had to resign from his campaign for public office over the allegation.

A few weeks later and there is Steve Lonegan again, holding a meeting of those who question the modern day sacrament of abortion.  The idea that in the passage from adolescence to adulthood, a woman's womb should first hold death before it holds life.  That's a heavy duty concept... Wiccan, even.

Steve Lonegan is a Roman Catholic.  Like many millions of Roman Catholics (as well as other religions and philosophies), Lonegan is Pro-Life regarding abortion.  He takes the exact position that his Church takes.

So someone from the campaign of Joshua S. Gottheimer -- a Member of the United States House of Representatives -- fires back at Lonegan and his gathering of mainly Roman Catholic Pro-Lifers.  The Gottheimer campaign calls them a "brand of extremism."

Come again?  The Roman Catholic church's teaching on abortion is very clear.  It believes the fetus to have a human soul and so, the body encompassing that soul is worthy of human protections.  It is a spiritual idea that one can respect even if you disagree with it from a pragmatic aspect.

But to dismiss it as a "brand of extremism"?  And from a Congressional office that wouldn't be caught dead saying the same thing about a tenant of the Muslim faith?  Or about a giveaway to rich members of the LGBT community?  Or about anyone or anything that the Establishment has said that we can't get away with criticizing?

Lots of media outlets covered the exchange and published the words of Gottheimer campaign spokesperson Andrew Edelson.  But a curious thing happened when the Lonegan campaign shot back a reply...

It wasn't covered.  It wasn't published.  In fact, so-called political blogs and websites that post EVERY press release from EVERY kind of critter imaginable would not post Lonegan's reply. 

So what was it that InsiderNJ and NJGLOBE and Politico and all the rest of the state's media didn't want you to read?  Well, here it is...

Yes, that's it.

They didn't publish an attack on Josh Gottheimer because it accused him of being an anti-Catholic bigot. 

See, you can accuse Republican Steve Lonegan of being an anti-gay bigot, based on a 12-year old accusation by a straight guy, but you can't accuse Democrat Josh Gottheimer of being an anti-Catholic bigot, based on a days-old statement from his campaign spokesperson.

This isn't about Republicans and Democrats as much as it is about anti-Roman Catholic hatred.  The Establishment -- its politicians, its media, academia, and the PC corporate world -- hates the Roman Catholic church.  They don't recognize anti-Catholic bigotry because, in their collective view, you cannot be anti-Catholic enough.

They want to tax all non-conforming, politically-incorrect religions out of existence.  For them, spirituality is meaningless unless it can be monetized and a good profit made from it.  They have no time for our old-fashioned Gods who speak of selflessness and balance.

Most of the media outlets in New Jersey -- and especially its political blogs -- are the trained lapdogs of the Establishment.  They will not even consider that something can be anti-Roman Catholic.  In their collective view, all things should be... anti-Roman Catholic.  They -- as is much of the rest of the Establishment -- are already operating in a Post-Christian world.  Their attitudes are visceral and displayed thoughtlessly.  They are the enemies of Faith.

And the enemies of justice.

Because shilling for someone like Josh Gottheimer sets a very low bar.  The behavior of this kitten from the Clinton years has been as astonishing as it has been repulsive, to all persons of good-will. 

Hey, don't take our word for it.  Here's what MSNBC's Rachel Maddow had to say about the firm where Josh Gottheimer held the number two position as International Vice President (his buddy Mark Penn was International President):

Yep, Josh Gottheimer and his pal Mark Penn ran the "PR Firm from Hell"!  So now we know who it is that the NJ media is shilling for.

DiGaetano: Is CD05 a choice between two bigots and the PR Firm from Hell?

The battle to represent the 5th congressional district has turned into a real shit show since candidate John McCann lost the favored ballot position in Bergen County and then followed up that bad news with the announcement that his campaign was in deep in debt.  For his latest attack on opponent Steve Lonegan, McCann dug up a twelve years old allegation by a Democrat candidate for Mayor in Lonegan's hometown of Bogota.  The Democrat is an avowed supporter of President Barack Obama and, like McCann, has campaigned against the Trump tax cuts.

The Democrat claims Lonegan called him a bad word in a heated exchange more than a decade ago.  This has led the McCann campaign to label Lonegan as the "Roy Moore of New Jersey" -- a reference to Alabama Senate candidate Judge Roy Moore.   But apparently someone on the McCann campaign didn't think this through because McCann's big fundraiser was built around a guest speaker who was one of Moore's main allies, a guy named Sebastian Gorka.  Take a look at the video below and note the fellow with the beard standing directly behind Moore:

McCann's attacks are taking place while his former boss and department -- the Democrat Sheriff of Bergen County -- are being sued for laying-off and allegedly harassing police officers.  McCann was named by the Bergen Record as the Sheriff's "right hand man" and McCann openly takes credit for getting rid of the police.  We will let NJTV tell the rest of the story:

https://www.njtvonline.org/news/video/lawsuit-bergen-county-officials-ignored-gay-cops-harassment-allegations/

Andrew Kara was one of the dozens of Bergen County cops who lost their jobs followed the merger of the sheriff’s and county police forces that congressional candidate John McCann takes credit for making happen.

“Andrew was called a fag, a queer, a freak and a homo,” said Kara’s attorney, Matthew Peluso.

The abuse went on for years and, according to a suit, the County Executive Jim Tedesco, County Sheriff Michael Saudino and the county prosecutor, now state attorney general, Gurbir Grewal, ignored his complaints.

“Andrew reported this conduct up the chain of command and nothing ever happened,” Peluso said.

During this period, candidate John McCann was the lawyer for the Sheriff's office and the "right hand man" to Sheriff Saudino, according to the Bergen Record.

Peluso says the lawsuit is "about standing up for a gay officer who has been treated cruelly by his supposed colleagues and the county’s leadership structure."

The suit has 21 plaintiffs who allege a variety of harassment.  It calls for reinstatement of the officers, including Kara, back pay, as well as punitive damages for pain and suffering.

Bergen County Republican Organization (BCRO) Chairman Paulie "the hand" DiGaetano has written to all the other GOP county chairs of the 5th congressional district, threatening them and telling them to demand that any GOP candidate connected with bigotry be required to stand down.  Does this mean that DiGaetano intends to deliver the 5th District meekly into the hands of Democrat Josh Gottheimer? 

We certainly hope not.

Is DiGaetano -- the doyen of the brylcreem set -- forgetting the kind of pissbag Josh Gottheimer is?  Doesn't he know the record of Josh "the breath monster" Gottheimer?  Well thank goodness someone does and she has his number.  Her name is Rachel Maddow, perhaps you've heard of her?

Before getting elected to Congress in 2016, Josh Gottheimer followed his buddy Mark Penn, the Clintons' polling guy, to take over an international public relations/lobbying corporation called Burson-Marsteller.  These people are real turds. 

Hey, don't take our word for it.  Here's what MSNBC's Rachel Maddow had to say about the firm where Josh Gottheimer held the number two position as International Vice President (his buddy Mark Penn was International President):

Yep, Josh Gottheimer and his pal Mark Penn ran the "PR Firm from Hell"!  So now we know what kind of shithouse Paulie is shilling for.

Al Doblin is speaking from "The Bubble"

Alfred P. Doblin is the Editorial Editor of the Record of Bergen and the surrounding counties.  His writing is strong, with few of the over-the-top emotions that are often on display over at the Star-Ledger.  He appears to try for balance, for persuasion instead of name-calling.      

But we fear he is trapped, as so many others are trapped, in a perception that is based more on geography and on class than on ideology or party identity. 

In his recent column -- "GOP at the crossroads" -- Mr. Doblin falls back on the tired values of an old religion.  Using terms like "mainstream right... extreme right... hard-line conservatives... social issues," we feel that he misses the lessons of the 2016 presidential election.

And who are the people Mr. Doblin turns to in his column to illuminate his argument?  All members of the ruling class:  former Governor Christie Whitman, global lobbyist Mike DuHaime, and Senator Kevin O'Toole Esq.

From them we get the same, tired prescriptions we get after every presidential election -- win or lose:  “(Republicans) can no longer be defined both statewide and nationally as the older white man’s party and expect to succeed (even though they just did)... (Republicans) have to do a lot more to attract females, to attract African-Americans, Asians, Hispanics. We have to be far more diverse than we have in the past.” 

The perspective of these people is one of class.  They are far, far more richer and more prosperous than the average American or the average Republican. When they speak of diversity it is the false diversity of gender, color, ethnicity, or sexual identity.  What is studiously ignored is class. 

In his book, White-Collar Government: The Hidden Role of Class in Economic Policy Making, Duke University's Nick Carnes points out that while upwards of 65 percent of citizens are "working class" and 54 percent are employed in a blue-collar occupation, just 2 percent of the members of Congress and 3 percent of state legislators held blue-collar jobs at the time of their election.  How about some diversity?

Donald Trump's campaign saw through the false political divide of Democrat and Republican to the vast economic and social divide that is the truer measure of America today.  Authors as diverse as George Packer of the New Yorker (The  Unwinding: An Inner History of the New America) to Charles Murray (Coming Apart: The State of White America, 1960-2010) to Chris Hedges (Days of Destruction Days of Revolt) to David Brooks (BoBos in Paradise: The New Upper Class and How They Got There) have written about this, with Brooks actually employing Donald Trump as an example of what the "new upper class" finds unfashionable.  In a prescient piece of writing, Ralph Nader gave an outline of what was coming when his book (Unstoppable: The Emerging Left-Right Alliance to Dismantle the Corporate State) was released in the summer of 2014.

On election night, MSNBC's Chris Matthews came closest to the mark, with this surprising exchange:

Of course, the ruling class will try to fit what happened back into the perception that they are most comfortable with -- and so we get the familiar postscripts about "old white men" and "diversity" of the surface variety.  It is an exercise in virtue signaling, whereby one member of the ruling class assures his "goodness" to another.

White collar America spends its time concerned about issues like the availability of condoms to Ivy Leaguers.  Such concerns are the marks of privilege. Blue collar America, working class America, worries about foreclosure, about housing, about having a job, about getting out of debt, about having enough to give their children the life that they've enjoyed.  With the greatest respect to Christie Whitman and Mike DuHaime and Kevin O'Toole, they don't have those problems.  So relieved of such pressing concerns, they can float above the mass and think sweet thoughts, reaffirming their "goodness" to one another.

The lack of shared experience places much of our ruling class, and those who aspire to it, into a kind of "bubble" -- secure and apart from the mass. Senator O'Toole's statement to Editor Doblin that what he regretted most was not voting for same-sex marriage is a symptom of that "bubble."  The Senator is a wise and judicious man and surely, if he thought about it a bit, he would have said that his greatest regret was not being able to cut property taxes down to a sane level.  For it is property taxes, a major driver of foreclosure and of homelessness, that is the greatest concern to the greatest many.

The idea that some Americans exist in "bubble" communities that vastly outstrip neighboring zip codes in status, wealth, cultural influence, and corporate/political power is not new.  Although now it seems to be going mainstream, filtering into "pop" culture.  Consider this recent skit from Saturday Night Live:

Wealthy professionals, like Al Doblin, should be aware of their class bias.  As a journalist, great care should be taken to seek out and include the opinions of genuine members of the working class for balance -- and not just members of the ruling class who happen to be labeled "diverse" for whatever reason